DreamArchitect wrote: Besides, he's already nominated for Best Screenplay and Best Picture. There is no hate. The Academy does not hate Nolan. Or else they would have shoved Nolan away from a screenplay nod and given it to Black Swan instead.
Writers nominate writers. Directors nominate directors. The screenplay nomination has nothing to do with the lack of directing nomination.
Last edited by apw on January 26th, 2011, 5:17 am, edited 1 time in total.
theweatherman wrote:You just criticized the story and blamed it on his direction. You could argue that he didn't bring the emotion that was laid out in the script to the screen. However it does not seem that this is what you meant. If the story lacked emotion than it is the fault of the script, if the emotion wasn't expressed well, than you could blame it on the direction.
Your reply confuses me so I don't know how my answer will turn out. Having read the screenplay, it seemed to have lacked basic and very strong emotional elements, with the exclusion of Cobb and Mal. But when I watch the movie, I didn't really feel the emotion Nolan was trying to express with Cobb and Mal (maybe because I already knew she was dead and was only a projection? etc.) Also, it is the directors job to direct the actors. Most of the characters lacked serious depth and development, which, if he had focussed on a lot more, would've probably had earned him a nom for directing. You see, Russel was nominated because he has 3 actors nominated, same with Hooper.
I had the exact opposite feelings about the Cobb and Mal emotional core.
But once again you complain about the lack of character depth, which is something that is clearly in the script and blame it on his directing. The characters were underwritten, but their were very subtle things that almost all the actors did to add a little life to them. I expect that had a great deal to do with Nolan's direction.
theweatherman wrote:I had the exact opposite feelings about the Cobb and Mal emotional core.
But once again you complain about the lack of character depth, which is something that is clearly in the script and blame it on his directing. The characters were underwritten, but their were very subtle things that almost all the actors did to add a little life to them. I expect that had a great deal to do with Nolan's direction.
For the life of me, I'll never understand why people claim Nolan makes cold films. We've discussed that a lot on here. Inception was extraordinarily emotionally involving for me. I teared up several times (
when she jumps, both times its shown, Fischer during Inception taking place, and when Cobb talks to Mal about how they did grow old together, and at the end a bit with the kids and that whole sequence. Also: goosebumps
, and found the film very intense on an emotional level.
I wasn't exactly tearing up at his other films really, I would say I was very invested in all the characters on a very emotional level.
I just feel that Nolan uses a certain brand of emotionality that's more real-world, less manipulative, and ultimately less theatrical in nature. Not that his films are the most involving ever, I'm just saying, they're a strong component of his pictures for me.
Also, as Ebert said, Nolan supervised the whole production quite intimately, if all the other categories, including of course best picture received nominations, it simply doesn't make sense that he didn't get one himself.
theweatherman wrote:I agree with everything you said. I just meant that I felt the film revealed these emotions much better than the script.
I would agree, especially so as you can tell (after having seen the film) that Nolan writes with much left to the actors to do. We've heard this for years, Nolan lets the actors do their thing, and guides them where he needs to.
theweatherman wrote:I had the exact opposite feelings about the Cobb and Mal emotional core.
But once again you complain about the lack of character depth, which is something that is clearly in the script and blame it on his directing. The characters were underwritten, but their were very subtle things that almost all the actors did to add a little life to them. I expect that had a great deal to do with Nolan's direction.
IDK I'm not complaining just voicing an opinion on the film. All I'm saying is there was lacking character depth. Screenplay or direction. Either way.
I just feel that Nolan uses a certain brand of emotionality that's more real-world, less manipulative, and ultimately less theatrical in nature. Not that his films are the most involving ever, I'm just saying, they're a strong component of his pictures for me.
Ding. Ding. DING! That's the answer.
And, why does every character have to have a character arc in films? I mean, you can't get stronger than the tragic love story between Cobb and Mal. I don't need to know the ins and outs of Eames, Arthur, or Ariadne. I mean, people act as if Inception had no character growth at all. The film is ALL about a specific character's growth....
DreamArchitect wrote:SNUB I seriously hate that term. Unless you're discussing how Brokeback Mountain was robbed because of the Academy's homophobia or how Saving Private Ryan lost to Shakespeare in Love etc. Can't we just not criticize these other talented directors? Can't we just agree that Nolan was not snubbed and that he just simply lost to six other worthy contenders? Besides, he's already nominated for Best Screenplay and Best Picture. There is no hate. The Academy does not hate Nolan. Or else they would have shoved Nolan away from a screenplay nod and given it to Black Swan instead. Just celebrate the fact that he's already getting twice the recognition already. I admit that the directing was good but not as great. Yes he spent 10 years writing a script, yes he produced the film, but they are judging on directing. His major flaw was that he failed to execute complex emotional values and themes into his story and characters. That's the thing I wish Nolan did. Just like he did with Memento. It was a very emotional storyline, and it worked well.
Just ask yourself, what if the Academy is waiting for Nolan to give his greatest acheivement? I cannot wait for that year.
Disagree, specifically the failure of executing complex emotional values and themes into his story and characters. Many film critics will disagree with you (like Kermode, Ebert and Roeper) Even film directors will disagree with you (DGA nom as a proof). Heck, even an ordinary film buff like me will disagree with you (do I need to prove that everyone is enraged with the SNUB?)
He is very much deserving this time. Just like with The Dark Knight. It's not that his competition is not good. He's just better. Yes... even better against Fincher and Aronofsky.
Jumpman wrote:I just feel that Nolan uses a certain brand of emotionality that's more real-world, less manipulative, and ultimately less theatrical in nature. Not that his films are the most involving ever, I'm just saying, they're a strong component of his pictures for me.
I concur. The Dark Knight has that kind of emotional tangibility - realistic and less theatrical. The same goes with all his films, especially INCEPTION, ehere another aspect of a great drama is added - SUBTLETY.
And all of those who were trying to find an emotional arc in other characters. well, sadly, they're missing the point of the film.
Jumpman wrote:And, why does every character have to have a character arc in films? I mean, you can't get stronger than the tragic love story between Cobb and Mal. I don't need to know the ins and outs of Eames, Arthur, or Ariadne. I mean, people act as if Inception had no character growth at all. The film is ALL about a specific character's growth....
